Microsoft Word - 12马向阳徐富明jz11-510_new_.doc

Size: px

Start display at page:

Download "Microsoft Word - 12马向阳徐富明jz11-510_new_.doc"

急健车
7 years ago
Views:

1 2012, Vol. 20, No. 5, Advances in Psychological Science DOI: /SP.J 说服效应的理论模型影响因素与应对策略 1 1, ( 1 ;, ) ( 2, ) 说服效应是指面临说服性信息时, 个体态度发生转变并影响其决策行为的一种现象, 该现象普遍存在于政治选举生活消费及商业广告等领域, 具有重要的应用价值说服效应的两个主要理论模型包括双加工模型和自我功效理论信息源的可信度情绪信息框架社会网络事件卷入度等是影响说服效应的主要因素说服效应的应对策略包括公开承诺和自我控制未来的研究应该从说服效应的产生根源特征成分及应用领域等方面进行深入地探讨说服效应 ; 精细可能性模型 ; 自我功效理论 ; 公开承诺 B849:C91 1 引言,, (learning theory principle), (Hovland, Janis, & Kelley, 1953), (Fazio, 1986),, Kelman (1958) (internalization) ; (identification),,, : :, fumingxu@126.com, (sleeper effect),,,, Peterson 和 Thurstone (1970) Four Sons Petrova Cialdini (2008) - (Availability-Valence Hypothesis),, 集以及这两, (,,, 2004) 735

络事件卷入度等是影响说服效应的主要因素说服效应的应对策略包括公开承诺和自我控制未来的研究应该从说服效应的产生根源特征成分及应用领域等方面进行深入地探讨说服效应 ; 精细可能性模型 ; 自我功效理论 ; 公开承诺

2 (Appel & Richter, 2007), (Kim, Rao, & Lee, 2009) (Huber & Arceneaux, 2007) (Chung & Trivedi, 2003), (Bertrand, Karlan, Mullainathan, Shafir, & Zinman, 2010), 2 说服效应的理论模型, 2.1 双加工模型 (the elaboration likelihood model, ELM) ELM (central route), ; (peripheral route) ELM ( ) (Pierro, Mannetti, Kruglanski, & Sleeth-Keppler, 2004),, (detraction) (Martin, Hamilton, McKimmie, Terry, & Martin, 2007),,, (Strick, Holland, van Baaren & van Knippenberg, 2010) ELM,,,,,, ELM, - (heuristic-systematic model, HSM) (Chaiken, Liberman, & Eagly, 1989) ELM,, ELM, (principle of least cognitive effort) ELM HSM, ;,, ELM, ELM, ELM, 2.2 自我功效理论, Petty, Briñol Tormala (2002) (self-validation analysis) ELM HSM,,, (Petty, Briñol, Tormala, & Wegener, 2007), (Petty & Briñol, 2008),

McKimmie, Terry, & Martin, 2007),,, (Strick, Holland, van Baaren & van Knippenberg, 2010) ELM,,,,,, ELM, - (heuristic-systematic model, HSM) (Chaiken, Liberman, & Eagly, 1989) ELM,, ELM,

3 5 : 737,, Petty (2002) -,, ; Briñol, Petty Barden (2007),,, (Tormala, Briñol, & Petty, 2006), (Briñol, Petty, Valle, Rucker, & Becerra, 2007),,, Petty,, ELM HSM 3 说服效应的影响因素,,,, 3.1 信息源的可信度, ;, Till Michael (2000) ( ) ( ),, Patzer (1983),,, (Caballero, James, & Charles, 1989),, 3.2 情绪, ;, (Schwarz & Clore, 1996) (DeSteno, Petty, Rucker, Wegener, & Braverman, 2004),,,

1 信息源的可信度, ;, Till Michael (2000) ( ) ( ),, Patzer (1983),,, (Caballero, James, &

4 Sinclair, Moore, Mark, Soldat Lavis (2010),,, 3.3 信息框架, Meyerowitz Chaiken (1987), (breast self-examination, BSE) BSE, Hoelzl (2008),, Gerdend Cullen (2008),, Bigman, Cappella Hornik (2010) 70% 30%, 70%, Nan (2005) (Krishnamurthy, Carter, & Blair, 2001) (Holler, Hoelzl, Kirchler, Leder, & Mannetti, 2008), (Huang & Wang, 2010), 3.4 社会网络, (Huckfeldt, Mendez, & Osborn, 2004) Visser Mirabile (2004),,, ELM Levitan Visser (2008) 3.5 事件卷入度 (issue involvement) ( ) Rothman, Salovey, Antone, Keough Martin (1993) (, ),, Sengupta, Goodstein Boninger (1997),, (O'Keefe, 2007), (Loraas, 2009), (González-Vallejo & Reid, 2006) (Aaker

Nan (2005) (Krishnamurthy, Carter, & Blair, 2001) (Holler, Hoelzl, Kirchler, Leder, & Mannetti, 2008), (Huang & Wang, 2010), 3.

5 5 : 739 & Maheswaran, 1997),, ELM,,, 4 说服效应的应对策略,, (public commitment) (self-control), 4.1 公开承诺,, (Hollenbeck, Williams, & Klein, 1989), (Cialdini & Trost, 1998) (Ahluwalia, Burnkrant, & Unnava, 2000), ;,, Gopinath Nyer (2009), (susceptibility to normative influence) (preference for consistency),,,, (attitude certainty) (issue importance),,,,,, 4.2 自我控制, (Muraven, Tice, & Baumeister, 1998),,, (Muraven et al., 1998),

2000), ;,, Gopinath Nyer (2009), (susceptibility to normative influence) (preference for consistency),,,,

6 Vohs 和 Heatherton (2000),, Burkley (2008),,, (depletion condition) ( ) ( ), (squeeze a handgrip), (Muraven et al., 1998),,,,,, 5 研究展望 5.1 深入探讨说服效应的机制性解释, ELM HSM,, Maio Haddock (2007) (the unimodel),,,, ELM HSM, (associativepropositional evaluation model) Gawronski Bodenhausen (2006),, (,, 2007),,,,, 5.2 研究说服效应神经机制 ELM,

1 深入探讨说服效应的机制性解释, ELM HSM,, Maio Haddock (2007) (the unimodel),,,, ELM HSM,

7 5 : 741 (Bless, Strack, & Walther, 2001), (Eagly, Kulesa, Chen, & Chaiken, 2001),, Klucharev, Smidts, & Fernández (2008), (Lieberman, 2007), 5.3 针对不同的成分和特征研究说服效应, (Maio & Haddock, 2007),,, (Haddock, Maio, Arnold, & Huskinson, 2008) 5.4 拓展说服效应的应用领域,,,, 叶娜, 佐斌. (2007). 联想 - 命题评价模型态度改变的新解释. 心理科学进展, 15(5), 张朝洪, 凌文辁, 方俐洛. (2004). 态度改变的睡眠者效应研究概述. 心理科学进展, 12(1), Aaker, J. L., & Maheswaran, D. (1997). The effect of cultural orientation on persuasion. Journal of Consumer Research, 24(3), Ahluwalia, R., Burnkrant, R. E., & Unnava, H. R. (2000). Consumer response to negative publicity: The moderating role of commitment. Journal of Marketing Research, 37(2), Appel, M., & Richter, T. (2007). Persuasive effects of fictional narratives increase over time. Media Psychology, 10(1), Bertrand, M., Karlan, D., Mullainathan,S., Shafir, E., & Zinman, J., (2010). What's advertising content worth? Evidence from a consumer credit marketing field experiment. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 125(1), Bigman, C. A., Cappella, J. N., & Hornik, R. C. (2010). Effective or ineffective: Attribute framing and the human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccine. Patient Education and Counseling, 81, Bless, H., Strack, F., & Walther, E. (2001). Memory as a target of social influence? Memory distortions as a function of social influence and metacognitive knowledge. In J. P. Forgas & K. D. Williams (Eds.), Social Influence: Direct and Indirect Processes (pp ). Philadelphia: Psychology Press. Briñol, P., Petty, R. E., & Barden, J. (2007). Happiness versus sadness as a determinant of thought confidence in persuasion: A self-validation analysis. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 93(5), Briñol, P., Petty, R. E., Valle, C., Rucker, D. D., & Becerra,

心理科学进展, 15(5), 834 839. 张朝洪, 凌文辁, 方俐洛. (2004). 态度改变的睡眠者效应研究概述. 心理科学进展, 12(1), 79 86. Aaker, J. L., & Maheswaran, D. (1997).

8 A. (2007). The effects of message recipients power before and after persuasion: A self-validation analysis. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 93(6), Burkley, E. (2008). The role of self-control in resistance to persuasion. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 34(3), Caballero, J., James, R. L., & Charles, S. M. (1989). Using physical attractiveness as an advertising tool: An empirical test of the attractiveness phenomenon. Journal of Advertising Research, 29(4), Chaiken, S., Liberman, A., & Eagly, A. H. (1989). Heuristic and systematic processing within and beyond the persuasion context. In J. S. Uleman & J. A. Bargh (Eds.), Unintended thought (pp ). New York: Guilford Press. Chung, J., & Trivedi, V. U. (2003). The effect of friendly persuasion and gender on tax comliance behavior. Journal of Business Ethics, 47(2), Cialdini, R. B., & Trost, M. R. (1998). Social influence: Social norms, conformity and compliance. In S. T. Fiske, D. T. Gilbert, & G. Lindzey (Eds.), The handbook of social psychology (Vol. 2, 4th ed., pp ). Boston: McGraw-Hill. DeSteno, D., Petty, R. E., Rucker, D. D., Wegener, D. T., & Braverman, J. (2004). Discrete emotions and persuasion: The role of emotion-induced expectancies. Journal of personality and Social Psychology, 86(1), Eagly, A. H., Kulesa, P., Chen, S., & Chaiken, S. (2001). Do attitudes affect memory? Tests of the congeniality hypothesis. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 10(1), 5 9. Fazio, R. H. (1986). How do attitudes guide behavior? In R. M. Sorrentino & E. T. Higgins (Eds.), The handbook of motivation and cognition: Foundations of social behavior (pp ). New York: Guilford Press. Gawronski, B., & Bodenhausen, G. V. (2006). Associative and propositional processes in evaluation: Conceptual, empirical, and metatheoretical issue: Reply to Albarracín, Hart, and McCulloch (2006), Kruglanski and Dechesne (2006), and Petty and Briñol (2006). Psychological Bulletin, 132(5), Gerend, M. A., & Cullen, M. (2008). Effects of message framing and temporal context on college student drinking behavior. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 44(4), González-Vallejo, C., & Reid, A. A. (2006). Quantifying persuasion effects on choice with the decision threshold of the stochastic choice model. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 100(2), Gopinath, M., & Nyer, P. U. (2009). The effect of public commitment on resistance to persuasion: The influence of attitude certainty, issue importance, susceptibility to normative influence, preference for consistency and source proximity. International Journal of Research in Marketing, 26(1), Haddock, G., Maio, G. R., Arnold, K., & Huskinson, T. (2008). Should persuasion be affective or cognitive? The moderating effects of need for affect and need for cognition. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 34(6), Hollenbeck, J. R., Williams, C. R., & Klein, H. J. (1989). An empirical examination of the antecedents of commitment to difficult goals. Journal of Applied Psychology, 74(6), Holler, M., Hoelzl, E., Kirchler, E., Leder, S., & Mannetti, L. (2008). Framing of information on the use of public finances, regulatory fit of recipients and tax compliance. Journal of Economic Psychology, 29(4), Hovland, C. I., Janis, I. L., & Kelley, H. H. (1953). Communication and persuasion: Psychological studies of opinion change. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press. Huang, Y. H., & Wang, L. (2010). Sex differences in framing effects across task domain. Personality and Individual Differences, 48(5), Huber, G. A., & Arceneaux, K. (2007). Identifying the persuasive effects of presidential advertising. American Journal of Political Science, 51(4), Huckfeldt, R., Mendez, J. M., & Osborn, T. (2004). Disagreement, ambivalence, and engagement: The political consequences of heterogeneous networks. Political Psychology, 25(1), Kelman, H. C. (1958). Compliance, identification and internalization: Three processes of attitude change. Journal of Conflict Resolution, 2(1), Kim, H., Rao, A. R., & Lee, A. Y. (2009). It`s time to vote: The effect of matching message orientation and temporal frame on political persuasion. The Journal of Consumer Research, 35(6), Klucharev, V., Smidts, A., & Fernández, G. (2008). Brain mechanisms of persuasion: How expert power modulates memory and attitudes. Social Cognitive and Affective Neuroscience, 3(4), Krishinamurthy, P., Carter, P., & Blair, E. (2001). Attribute framing and goal framing effects in health decisions. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 85(2), Levitan, L. C., & Visser, P. S. (2008). The impact of the social context on resistance to persuasion: Effortful versus effortless responses to counter-attitudinal information. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 44(3),

Using physical attractiveness as an advertising tool: An empirical test of the attractiveness phenomenon. Journal of Advertising Research, 29(4), 16 22. Chaiken, S., Liberman, A., & Eagly, A. H.

9 5 : Lieberman, M. D. (2007). Social cognitive neuroscience: A review of core processes. Annual Review of Psychology, 58, Loraas, T. (2009). The effects of quantification on persuasion in unfamiliar contexts: The case of information systems controls. Advances in Accounting, 25(1), Maio, G. R., & Haddock, G. (2007). Attitude change. In E. T. Higgins & A. W. Kruglanski (Eds.), Social psychology: A handbook of basic principles (pp ). New York: Guilford. Martin, P. Y., Hamilton, V. E., McKimmie, B. M., Terry, D. J., & Martin, R. L. (2007). Effects of caffeine on persuasion and attitude change: The role of secondary tasks in manipulating systematic message processing. European Journal of Social Psychology, 37(2), Meyerowitz, B. E., & Chaiken, S. (1987). The effect of message framing on breast self-examination attitudes, intentions, and behavior. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 52, Muraven, M., Tice, D. M., & Baumeister, R. F. (1998). Self-control as a limited resource: Regulatory depletion patterns. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 74(3), Nan, X. L. (2005). The impact of consumer skepticism and issue involvement on the goal framing effect: A persuasion knowledge perspective. Unpublished doctorial dissertation, University of Minnesota. O`Keefe, D. J. (2007). Potential conflicts between normatively-responsible advocacy and successful social influence: Evidence from persuasion effects research. Argumentation, 21(2), Patzer, G. L. (1983). Source credibility as a function of communicator physical attractiveness. Journal of Business Research, 11(2), Peterson, R. C., & Thurstone, L. L. (1970). The effect of motion pictures on the social attitudes of high school children. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Petrova, P. K., & Cialdini, R. B. (2008). Evoking the Imagination as a Strategy of Influence. In C. P. Haugtvedt, P. M. Herr & F. R. Kardes (Eds.), Handbook of consumer psychology (pp ). New York: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Petty, R. E., & Briñol, P. (2008). Persuasion: From single to multiple to metacognitive processes. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 3(2), Petty, R. E., Briñol, P., & Tormala, Z. L. (2002). Thought confidence as a determinant of persuasion: The self-validation hypothesis. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 82(5), Petty, R. E., Briñol, P., Tormala, Z. L., & Wegener, D. T. (2007). The role of meta-cognition in social judgment. In E. T. Higgins & A. W. Kruglanski (Eds.), Social psychology: A handbook of basic principles (2nd ed., pp ). New York: Guilford Press. Pierro, A., Mannetti, L., Kruglanski, A. W., & Sleeth-Keppler, D. (2004). Relevance override: On the reduced impact of cues under high motivation conditions of persuasion studies. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 86(2), Rothman, A. J., Salovey, P., Antone, C., Keough, K., & Martin, C. D. (1993). The influence of message framing on intentions to perform health behaviors. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 29, Schwarz, N., & Clore, G. L. (1996). Feeling and phenomenal experiences. In E. T. Higgins & A. W. Kruglanski (Eds.), Social psychology: Handbook of basic principles (pp ). New York: Guilford Press. Sengupta, J., Goodstein, R. C., & Boninger, D. S. (1977). All cues are not created equal: Obtaining attitude persistence under low-involvement conditions. Journal of Consumer Research, 23(4), Sinclair, R. C., Moore, S. E., Mark, M. M., Soldat, A. S., & Lavis, C. A. (2010). Incidental moods, source likeability, and persuasion: Liking motivates message elaboration in happy people. Cognition and emotion, 24(6), Strick, M., Holland, R. W., van Baaren, R. B., & van Knippenberg, A., (2010). The puzzle of joking: Disentangling the cognitive and affective components of humorous distraction. European Journal of Social Psychology, 40(1), Till, B. D., & Michael, B. (2000). The Match-up hypothesis: Physical attractiveness, expertise, and the role of fit on brand attitude, purchase intent and brand beliefs. Journal of Advertising, 29(3), Tormala, Z. L., Briñol, P., & Petty, R. E. (2006). When credibility attacks: The reverse impact of source credibility on persuasion. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 42(5), Visser, P. S., & Mirabile, R. R. (2004). Attitudes in the social context: The impact of social network composition on individual-level attitude strength. Journal of personality and Social Psychology, 87(6), Vohs, K. D., & Heatherton, T. F. (2000). Self-regulatory failure: A resource-depletion approach. Psychological Science, 11(3),

In E. T. Higgins & A. W. Kruglanski (Eds.), Social psychology: A handbook of basic principles (pp. 565 586). New York: Guilford. Martin, P. Y., Hamilton, V. E., McKimmie, B. M., Terry, D. J.

10 Theoretical Models, Influencing Factors and Coping Strategies of the Persuasion Effect MA Xiang-Yang 1 ; XU Fu-Ming 1,2 ; WU Xiu-Liang 1 ; PAN Jing 1 ; LI Tian 1 ( 1 Key Laboratory of Adolescent Cyberpsychology and Behavior (CCNU), Ministry of Education; School of Psychology, Central China Normal University, and Hubei Human Development and Mental Health Key Laboratory, Wuhan , China) ( 2 Institute of Psychology, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing , China) Abstract: Persuasion effect was defined as a phenomenon that individual changes his attitude and behavioral decision when faced with persuasive information. This phenomenon has important application value and is universal in political elections, consumption and commercial advertising. The dual process model and self-validation hypothesis are two theoretical models of the persuasion effect, namely. The influential factors of persuasion effect include credibility of sources, emotions, message framing, social networks and issue involvement. The effective strategies of persuasion effect contain public commitment and self-control. The deficiencies existing in current research are discussed and the directions for future research on persuasion effect are suggested. Key words: persuasion effect; the elaboration likelihood model; self-validation theory; public commitment

430079, China) ( 2 Institute of Psychology, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100101, China) Abstract: Persuasion effect was defined as a phenomenon that individual changes his attitude and

作主动追求知识获取技能, 在心理和生理上都非常积极的个体 (Zimmerman & Pons, 1986) 在此期间, 自我效能感 (self-efficacy) 自我控制 (self-control) 自我管理 (self-

作主动追求知识获取技能, 在心理和生理上都非常积极的个体 (Zimmerman & Pons, 1986) 在此期间, 自我效能感 (self-efficacy) 自我控制 (self-control) 自我管理 (self- 网络环境中英语学习者自我调控的个体特征研究 A Qualitative Study of Chinese EFL Learners Online Self-regulation * 1,2 郑春萍, 穆婕 2, 章僖格 2, 苑仁庆 2, 李芒 1 北京师范大学教育学部 2 北京邮电大学人文学院 * zhengchunping@bupt.edu.cn